Larry Alan Warch v. Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, and Ohio Casualty Group

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that employee who was repeatedly reprimanded for performance and instructed on how to improve was not meeting employer’s legitimate performance expectations
• holding that direct evidence is “evidence of conduct or statements that both reflect directly the alleged discriminatory attitude and that bear directly on the contested employment decision”
• holding that a plaintiff who had produced some direct and circumstantial evidence had nevertheless “failed to create a genuine dispute that he was the victim of illegal age discrimination”
• holding that a plaintiff who had produced some direct and circumstantial evidence had nevertheless “failed to create a genuine dispute that he was the victim of illegal age discrimination”
• holding that “[a]lthough on summary judgment an employer is free to assert that the job expectation prong has not been met, nothing prohibits the employee from countering this assertion with evidence”
• holding that an employee who had been put on probation after a string of negative reviews related to multiple areas of his job performance failed to show that he was meeting his employer's legitimate job expectations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).